[quote author=ACRFan link=topic=99.msg505#msg505 date=1276090980]
If I had to guess why the controversy, it would be because Magpul designed the concept and it was good. People loved it. [glow=red,2,300]Magpul wanted it to be extremely affordable[/glow]. That was one of the big selling points. People had expectations of $1500 or maybe even as much as $1800. But when Magpul licenses the rights to the gun to a 3rd party manufacturer, who obviously wanted to redesign it and then the price is announced at SHOT and is almost twice the original projected cost given that over half of the gun is polymer, people get upset and it puts a bad taste in their mouth that will linger for quite some time.
In the AR world - most consider BM to be a lower end manufacturer of the platform. Hence when people were excited about Magpul making the ACR and then they have BM make it, they again get upset. Firearms are like sports. People take it personally.
BM and Remington are fine manufacturers.
I also think people are asking the question: What does the ACR do better than the SCAR, Piston AR/M4, XCR, etc. This, at least in my opinion, is why the AR/M4 platform has such a hold on the market. People are not looking for evolutionary, but rather revolutionary.
I think the ACR is a fine gun. So is the SCAR. So is the XCR. So is the AR/M4. You should buy what you want and not worry about what other people think or say. If you own an ACR, anyone who badmouths it is jealous.
[/quote]
Since when has Magpul had anything extremty affordable? $229 for a freaking buttstock?
I always wonder why people seem to quote the "peoples gun" thing. Magpul is good stuff, dont get me wrong, but shits expensive.
BTW, loving my ACR 600 rounds down. bought 600 more today.
